Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ sjatkins 5 years, 10 months ago
    I don't believe she would appreciate being on such a worthless piece of fiat currency but would appreciate being honored as much as those that are on such bills. Nor would she appreciated the "In God we trust" put on our money since sometime in the 50s IIRC.

    I do notice that I encounter less anti-Rand vitriol of late for which I am thankful.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by a59430802sojourner 5 years, 10 months ago
    While i'm in partial agreement with Ayn Rand on a gold coin, i prefer Midas Mulligan's $. And as far a putting her on a worthless piece of paper that is nothing more than the passing of debt, (Federal Reserve Notes are IOUs), form one place to another, she deserves much better than that.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 10 months ago
    The issue actually, however, has nothing to do with women and their contributions. It is all about marginalizing the Founding Fathers of this nation and their contributions to the birth of what used to be the greatest nation of free will and natural rights this world has ever known. They want to start with Hamilton because most people have never studied American History and don't understand his role in the Founding of this Nation, from fighting alongside George Washington in the Revolutionary War to his role as a "devil's advocate" in drafting the Articles of Confederation and then the Constitution. He was also this nations first Secretary of the Treasury - a totally appropriate person to put on money!

    Regarding Ayn Rand, however, like freedomforall I think she'd object to being placed on fiat currency because of the false proposition of value. I'd rather see her on a $10 gold coin.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo